Jaw.kr
   
³»¿ë¾øÀ½9
³»¿ë¾øÀ½10

ȸ¿øµî·Ï £ü ºñ¹øºÐ½Ç
ÀÚ·á½Ç


 publication
°ÔÀç ³í¹®
°­³²¼¼ºê¶õ½ºº´¿ø ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°ú¿¡¼­ ³ª°£ ³í¹®µéÀÔ´Ï´Ù.
¤ýÀÛ¼ºÀÚ jaw
¤ýÀÛ¼ºÀÏ 2021-05-06 (¸ñ) 12:50
¤ýºÐ ·ù ±¹¿Ü(SCI)
¤ýÇÐȸÁö ÇØ¿Ü±âŸ
¤ý¿¬µµ 2021
¤ý±Ç(È£¼ö) 11(1)
¤ýÁ¦1ÀúÀÚ ±èÀ翵 ±èµ¿¿í
¤ý±³½ÅÀúÀÚ ÇãÁ¾±â
¤ýÁ¶È¸: 8523  
Using deep learning to predict temporomandibular joint disc perforation based on magnetic resonance imaging
2021 Mar 23;11(1):6680.
 doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-86115-3.

Using deep learning to predict temporomandibular joint disc perforation based on magnetic resonance imaging

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-86115-3

Abstract

The goal of this study was to develop a deep learning-based algorithm to predict temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc perforation based on the findings of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to validate its performance through comparison with previously reported results. The study objects were obtained by reviewing medical records from January 2005 to June 2018. 299 joints from 289 patients were divided into perforated and non-perforated groups based on the existence of disc perforation confirmed during surgery. Experienced observers interpreted the TMJ MRI images to extract features. Data containing those features were applied to build and validate prediction models using random forest and multilayer perceptron (MLP) techniques, the latter using the Keras framework, a recent deep learning architecture. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was used to compare the performances of the models. MLP produced the best performance (AUC 0.940), followed by random forest (AUC 0.918) and disc shape alone (AUC 0.791). The MLP and random forest were also superior to previously reported results using MRI (AUC 0.808) and MRI-based nomogram (AUC 0.889). Implementing deep learning showed superior performance in predicting disc perforation in TMJ compared to conventional methods and previous reports.

   
  0
3500
 
¹øÈ£     ±Û Á¦ ¸ñ ÇÐȸÁö ¿¬µµ ±Ç(È£¼ö) Á¦1ÀúÀÚ ±³½ÅÀúÀÚ Á¶È¸
146 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Orthognathic surgery of temporomandibular disorder.. ´ë±¸¿ÜÁö 2021 47(2) ÇãÁ¾±â ÇãÁ¾±â 5314
145 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) Using deep learning to predict temporomandibular j.. ÇØ¿Ü±âŸ 2021 11(1) ±èÀ翵 ±èµ¿¿í ÇãÁ¾±â 8523
144 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) Three-dimensional assessment of the anterior and i.. ÇØ¿Ü±âŸ 2021 21(1) ±èÀ翵 ¹Ú±¤È£ 7997
143 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) Craniofacial and dental injuries associated with s.. ÇØ¿Ü±âŸ 2021 ±è¹Î½Ä ±èÀ翵 6321
142 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) Is There a Difference in Condyle Position Changing.. JOMS 2020 78(4) ±èÀ翵 ¹Ú±¤È£ 9816
141 ±¹³»(SCI) ¸é¿ª¾ïÁ¦Á¦ º¹¿ë ȯÀÚ¿¡¼­ÀÇ ÀÓÇöõÆ® ½Ä¸³ÈÄ ¹ß»ýÇÑ .. ±¹³»±âŸ 2019 23(4) ±è´ëÈÆ ÇãÁ¾±â 1050
140 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Three-dimensional computed tomography evaluation o.. ¾Ç¼ºÇÐȸÁö 2019 41(1) ÃÖÈ¿¿ø ¹Ú±¤È£ 3001
139 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Modified difficult index adding extremely difficul.. ´ë±¸¿ÜÁö 2019 45 ±èÀ翵 ÇãÁ¾±â 1672
138 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Differential Diagnosis and Treatment of Septic Art.. ±¹³»±âŸ 2019 44(3) ±èº¸¶ó ÇãÁ¾±â 3608
137 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) Clinical and microbiologic investigation of an exp.. ÇØ¿Ü±âŸ 2019 19(1) Seong WJ Seong WJ 15962
136 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Effect of initial placement level and wall thickne.. ±¹³»±âŸ 2019 49(3) Yoo JH Lee DW 9616
135 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Effect of bisphosphonate on temporomandibular join.. ¾Ç¼ºÇÐȸÁö 2019 41(1) Kim JY Huh JK 3158
134 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) The relationship between oral tori and bite force... ÇØ¿Ü±âŸ 2019 37(4) Jeong CW Huh JK 8648
133 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Three-dimensional analysis of the anterior loop of.. ¾Ç¼ºÇÐȸÁö 2018 40(1) Yoon S Park KH 6244
132 ±¹³»(ÇÐÁø) Subcutaneous emphysema related to dental procedure.. ´ë±¸¿ÜÁö 2018 44(5) Á¤Ã¶Èñ ÇãÁ¾±â 8739
131 ±¹¿Ü(SCI) A nomogram for classification of temporomandibular.. OOOOE 2018 125(6) Kim JY Huh JK 1468
12345678910

       ¼­¿ï½Ã °­³²±¸ ¾ðÁÖ·Î 211 °­³²¼¼ºê¶õ½ºº´¿ø ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°ú
   GSOMS v.1 (YDOMS v.3) since 2000